SORRY! This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else!
That means that Roberts did NOT do his duty. Not only that but he disregarded his duty to the Constitution.
Anything else is just an excuse for his vote.
Yes, I am getting madder by the day!!
WHAT YOU SAID!! And, I'm also getting more and more pissed off with each passing day.
Yea me too.
It’s settling in very bitter.
Exactly. Roberts screwed the pooch, AND, the American people. He can regain integrity by admitting he did wrong, and resigning. Obama won’t have time to replace him before he is thrown out on his commie arse.
AMEN!!
What Deagle said, 100% in agreement:
SORRY! This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else!
That means that Roberts did NOT do his duty. Not only that but he disregarded his duty to the Constitution.
Anything else is just an excuse for his vote.
Yes, I am getting madder by the day!!
You fail to see that you are siding with Roberts.
He agrees with you. The court’s job is not to legislate. So he told the truth: the Dems lied in refusing to call a tax a tax, it’s a terrible piece of legislation, it’s not the court’s job to legislate, and those who messed it up need to fix it.
It is constitutional for Congress to tax and, apparently, to lie about it.
So the response is to do what? Vote for anyone who seeks to overturn Obamacare..........right?
That was the point.
If Obamacare is a tax, then it is constitutional.
Please...
Explain to me how roberts did not do his duty...
Please explain to me where he did not uphold the constitution...
—SORRY! This is NOT the job of the Supreme Court! They are suppose to rule on Constitutionality, not anything else!—
Exactly. What is even more hilarious about this is Krautmeyer says, in one breath, “Law upheld, Supreme Court’s reputation for neutrality maintained.” and in the next breath, “I think the “mandate is merely a tax” argument is a dodge, and a flimsy one at that.”
What Roberts did, was to allow an unconstitutional law to remain while, at the same time, make the court the laughing stock of the nation.
Sometimes you have to do what is right and let the chips fall where they may. I don’t think they teach that in law school, though.
Krauthammer isn’t defending what Roberts did, he’s just trying to understand it.
I think his understanding in this case is pretty good.
I'm angry as hell too and, like you, detest the "silver lining" spins.